首页> 外文期刊>Social science and medicine >Is patient involvement possible when decisions involve scarce resources? A qualitative study of decision-making in primary care.
【24h】

Is patient involvement possible when decisions involve scarce resources? A qualitative study of decision-making in primary care.

机译:当决策涉及稀缺资源时,患者是否有可能参与进来?对初级保健决策制定的定性研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Greater patient involvement has become a key goal of health care provision. This study explored the way in which general practitioners (GPs) in the UK manage the dual responsibilities of treating individual patients and making the most equitable use of National Health Service (NHS) resources in the context of the policy of greater patient involvement in decision-making. We undertook a qualitative study incorporating a series of interviews and focus groups with a sample of 24 GPs. We analysed GP accounts of decision-making by relating these to substantive ethical principles and the key procedural principle of explicitness in decision-making. GPs saw patient involvement in positive terms but for some GPs involvement served an instrumental purpose, for instance improving patient 'compliance'. GPs identified strongly with the role of patient advocate but experienced role tensions particularly with respect to wider responsibilities for budgets, populations, and society in general. GPs had an implicit understanding of the key ethical principle of explicitness and of other substantive ethical principles but there was incongruence between these and their interpretation in practice. Limited availability of GP time played an important role in this theory/practice gap. GPs engaged in implicit categorisation of patients, legitimating this process by reference to the diversity and complexity of general practice. If patient involvement in health care decision-making is to be increased, then questions of scarcity of resources, including time, will need to be taken into account. If strategies for greater patient involvement are to be pursued then this will have significant implications for funding primary care, particularly in terms of addressing the demands made on consultation time. Good ethics and good professional practice cost money and must be budgeted for. More explicit decision-making in primary care will need to be accompanied by greater explicitness at the national level about roles and responsibilities. Increased patient involvement has consequences for GP training and ways of addressing rationing dilemmas will need to be an important part of this training. Further research is needed to understand micro-decision-making, in particular the spaces in which processes of implicit categorisation lead to distorted communication between doctor and patient.
机译:病人的更多参与已成为提供医疗保健的关键目标。这项研究探索了英国的全科医生(GPs)在患者更多地参与决策的政策中,如何处理治疗个体患者和最公平地利用国家卫生服务(NHS)资源的双重责任。制造。我们进行了定性研究,纳入了一系列访谈和焦点小组,并抽取了24名全科医生。我们通过将GP决策与实体伦理原则和决策明确性的关键程序原则相关联来分析GP决策。全科医生以积极的态度看待患者的参与,但是对于某些全科医生而言,其起到了工具性的作用,例如改善了患者的“依从性”。全科医生强烈认同患者倡导者的角色,但经历了角色紧张,尤其是在预算,人群和整个社会的广泛责任方面。 GP对明确的关键道德原则和其他实质性的道德原则有隐含的理解,但在实践中它们与它们的解释之间并不一致。 GP时间的有限可用性在此理论/实践差距中发挥了重要作用。全科医生进行患者的隐式分类,通过参考全科医师的多样性和复杂性来使这一过程合法化。如果要增加患者对医疗保健决策的参与,则需要考虑资源短缺(包括时间)的问题。如果要采取更多患者参与的策略,那么这将对资助初级保健产生重大影响,特别是在满足咨询时间需求方面。良好的道德操守和良好的专业作法要花钱,必须为此做好预算。在初级保健中做出更明确的决策时,需要在国家一级对角色和责任做出更明确的规定。越来越多的患者参与将对GP培训产生影响,解决配给难题的方法将成为该培训的重要组成部分。需要进一步的研究来理解微观决策制定,尤其是隐式分类过程导致医生与患者之间的沟通失真的空间。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号